Fairness regulates rather than generates the moralized expression of evolved dispositions

Evidence

There are, from a mutualistic point of view, two main ways in which to approach this challenge, one involving a broader and the other a narrower understanding of morality. On the one hand, one could make the argument that the mutualistic framework well understood readily extends to all these normative systems, providing a way to unify morality understood fairly broadly. This position does not deny that humans are equipped with a variety of other dispositions, such as kin altruism, coalitionary psychology, or disgust, that evolved to solve other evolutionary challenges (such as raising offspring or avoiding pathogens). It claims that in so far as these behaviors are moralized, they are so because they are regulated by considerations of fairness. The argument is similar to the case of anger previously discussed (see sect. R3.2). Anger did not evolve to motivate individuals to behave morally, and indeed it often leads individuals to be immoral. Sometimes, however, it is regulated and constrained by moral considerations, for instance, when individuals accept not going too far in their retaliation. In these cases, anger appears to be regulated by considerations of fairness (proportionality between the tort inflicted on the victim and the harm inflicted on the attacker). Thus, according to this view, fairness does not give rise to sexual or maternal behaviors, but regulates their expression in mutually advantageous situations. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 692

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies the key mutualistic move: fairness as a regulator of pre-existing evolved dispositions (anger, kin altruism, disgust) rather than the source of them — a distinct theoretical stance on the architecture of moral cognition.
• XREF: Connects to the reader’s ‘Complaints About Immodesty’ piece and to wider debates on moral foundations vs. single-mechanism accounts (Graham/Haidt’s moral foundations theory as the implicit foil). — connects to: Mutualistic anthropology explains moral anger as an evolved fairness-restoring mechanism — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 354; Respect for ownership is a distinct evolved motive, deeper than fairness. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 579; Morality is an evolved sense of fairness, not a late intellectual achievement — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 656 (+8 more)

Related

• Mutualistic anthropology explains moral anger as an evolved fairness-restoring mechanism (similarity 0.87)
• Fairness impulses must compete against natural selfish impulses via self-regulation (similarity 0.85)
• Anger at being cheated was necessary for fairness to become intrinsically valued (similarity 0.84)
• Morality is an evolved sense of fairness, not a late intellectual achievement (similarity 0.84)
• Human morality may rest on a general normativizing capacity, not a dedicated fairness module. (similarity 0.83)
• Fairness-based morality is uniquely human despite similar selective conditions in animals. (similarity 0.82)
• Moral emotions are dominated by punitive anger, not avoidance (similarity 0.81)
• Respect for ownership is a distinct evolved motive, deeper than fairness. (similarity 0.80)
• Anger deters aggression and seeks bargaining power rather than fairness. (similarity 0.79)
• Morality evolved as a propensity for fair cost-benefit sharing among cooperators. (similarity 0.79)
• Moral fairness may itself have been shaped by natural selection. (similarity 0.78)
• Moral psychology broadened fairness-only models to include purity, hierarchy, and coalition domains. (similarity 0.78)
• Moral anger tracks the offender’s intentions, not just the harm done (similarity 0.78)
• Hierarchy norms derive from an evolved sense of hierarchy, not fairness. (similarity 0.78)
• Mutualistic cost-benefit logic may explain transcendent moral sentiment. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Fairness impulses must compete against natural selfish impulses via self-regulation #qualifies (0.82) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 242